![CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/cmip5-73-models-vs-obs-20n-20s-mt-5-yr-means11.png?quality=75)
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Market Watch, a subsidiary of Dow Jones and News Corp, has provided advice on how we should climate proof our lives. But the assumptions behind their advice are as shaky as any climate model.
Here’s how your finances will be impacted by climate change
Our planet is warming, putting at risk not only our physical well-being, but our wallets.
2016 is shaping up to be the hottest year on record and scientists say global temperatures may rise by 7 degrees Fahrenheit before the end of the 21st century. As climate change escalates, cities are building sea walls, seeking new water sources for drought-stricken land, and storm-proofing their infrastructure in preparation. But while impending environmental impact of rising temperatures may be the most tangible, the often-overlooked effects on our pocketbooks may be just as worrisome, according to David Stookey, author of new book “Climate-Proof Your Personal Finances” published the Savvy Families Institute, an organization he heads that is based in Rhode Island.
“The physical problems are going to affect relatively few people in America — a much broader number are going to experience these problems financially,” he said. “The physical risks are nothing compared with the financial risks.” For this generation, at least.
…
Read more: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/6-ways-to-prepare-your-finances-for-climate-change-2016-12-20
So what advice does Market Watch offer?
- Re-evaluate your budget – by this Market Watch expect food prices to soar by up to 84% by 2050. They recommend eating less beef. This prediction is nonsense – the agricultural technology of 35 years from now will cope with anything the climate can throw at it.
- Straighten out your insurance – they suggest increased mental health insurance, to cope with the stress of climate storms. How about mental health insurance, to cope with silly climate claims?
- Pick a climate-safe job – by this Market Watch suggests you get a job in construction, for repairing all that anticipated superstorm damage. This is bad advice, even if storm damage rises. Construction is rapidly being automated, in a few decades construction will be almost entirely robotic.
- Warming-proof your investments – Market Watch suggests investing in clean energy and nuclear energy. Clean energy is currently not competitive, and may never be competitive, so most clean energy businesses rely on massive government subsidies for their return on investment – subsidies which are subject to fickle political whims. Investing in a business which could be wiped out by the stroke of a politician’s pen seems a risky proposition.
- Climate-proof your home – This is good advice anyway, check your home has adequate protection against flood risk and other natural threats
- Consider making a move – One of the cities on their “low risk” list is Seattle. Seattle is facing a serious risk of an offshore mega quake which could raise gigantic tsunamis. 15% of Seattle is built on “liquefiable land” – land which turns to Quicksand in the face of a major Earthquake. I suggest a list which overlooks such a major issue is as badly researched as most other climate claims.
Overall a very poor effort, from a news outlet which claims to have investment expertise. Even if their assumption are right, which seems doubtful, the advice they provide would be a suboptimal response to those assumptions.
The mid boggles, well, at least the educated and experienced mind boggles.
It would be interesting to know if ANYBODY follows ANY of this advice.
If they do, you will be able to identify them easily: they will be the ones standing on the corner with a sign reading “Will work for food”. I suggest you throw them a coconut.
Why doesn’t the chart go to 2016? Surely there must be data. It stops around 2011 (for the observations)…
The plot is 5 year running average, also called moving mean.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_average
If you mean by “chart” the one at the top of this post then be aware that it is a models versus observations graphic that has nothing to do with the Market Watch article.
This is a bit like seeing a tennis star or Mr. T. on a box of cereal, or a bunch of pretty flowers on a seed packet. These things are not inside.
We have data almost to 2017, Why is there no data to 2016??? I still don’t get it…
More clearly. The chart is a screen grab from another time, another post, another author. It is there to attract attention — nothing more. It is not meant to contain information relevant to this specific post.
Anyone can make an updated chart — if one wants to. I do not. Apparently, Eric Worrall did not. You can do so, or not.
Merry Christmas.
This one of those things where the contrarian approach is called for.
A more appropriate question would be how to find a safe climate job. These will shortly become as scarce as hen’s teeth.
Not to be picky, but you know that the Global Temp is over the models at the moment. Should really update your graphic.
It isn’t actually.
It may be over the models’ lower bound.
https://moyhu.blogspot.com/2016/12/current-global-temps-compared-with-cmip.html#links
That is a bait and switch. Christy’s graph uses MSU Stokes’ uses thermometers.
Ho-hum. Just another plug to hype a book.. Might have been paid for it..
Many of the old brand names in media, such as Market Watch or Consumer Reports, are unrecognizable today as they have wandered away from their core mission and have become dispensers of progressive agit/prop. Fortunately, the internet gives us many alternatives.
S’funny, here in the tropics, the two main products seem to be cattle & sugar, so I can’t see how beef production will be affected by a little warmth.
Absolutely, some of Australia’s best beef country is well tropical.
Total nonsense. We don’t know the future. So, the best preparation is less depencency on land and nature, which btw is a key ingrediënt of progress anyhow. Progress is allmost synonimus with power. We need power sources that are reliable , cheap and abundant. That’s our warrenty against whatever to come. Nuclear is the only technology which may succeed fossil. Energy transition must start with vigorous nucleat research, there is no choice. Land and nature dependent energy systems will cause regression to a feudal state: few rich and many poor, their servants.
Robotic construction, give me a break! 3D printing ‘houses’ (sheds in reality) is a dead end fantasy.
I’d like to see robots doing this.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/news/2015/january/blue-whale-to-take-centre-stage-museum.html
I started in engineering writing computer drawing software for the top consulting engineers in UK (because writing your own was the only practical way to get it in those days). There was much talk of complete 3D models of buildings being the way to go. 40 years later it still is just talk while everybody who has to put up and repair buildings every day just gets on with 2D drawings that IK Brunel would have no trouble reading.
Started on the wine a bit early, sorry!
Like the large scale 3D printed models of buildings this firm is producing you mean?
http://www.hobsstudio.com/introducing-largest-3d-printer-uk/
Griff, get real, there is no comparison.
Nigel S. Thank you, I have sent my recently graduated Zoologist daughter the link to this. There is a bursary supported placement available and she would love it if she could get it.
I would also love it if she could get it, better still, I got it!!!! 🙂
One of my favourite places on the planet. Debate Climate Change there, and the will to dominate nature evaporates with every step.
Humans are but a moment in time, we have no idea.
My advice for a safe job pick, no matter what happens:
Get a job in wine production.
If it is a hot day, people like to drink white wine.
If it is a cold day, people like high alcohol reds, or a port.
If the economy is going badly people need a drink, to drown their sorrows.
If the economy is doing well people like to party and celebrate.
Make sure that the winery you work for owns a tanker, or has access to tankers. That way if their is a local shortage of grapes, you can haul in juice or wine from elsewhere, and still have product to sell!
Depends on your definition of “construction.”
GE uses it for jet engine parts that used to be “constructed” in some other way.
In other news: Vegetables are grown in buildings without using tractors.
Farmers that still need tractors no longer need drivers.
Years ago, I spent a summer swinging a hammer. Hammers have been replaced.
Wages, medical insurance, and retirement costs, where avoidable, will be.
A craftsman who is able to design, construct and repair houses will never get jobless. There is always something to improve or repair.
People love to live in houses with individual designs and craftsmanship.
If one needs a wonderful, individual, earthquake-proof house which lasts for centuries he should think about the half-wooden or timber framework houses like they have built for centuries, and still are lasting.
Here in Germany you will get them to the same prices as prefab houses, and you can still save money by doing a lot of work by yourself.
The climate extremist social mania is infecting every nook and cranny of our public space. I hope someone will dramatically and publicly disrupt this process before more serious damage is inflicted by this nonsense.
Umm, here is my recommendation.
If you are in the Green Industry, get out.
If you invest in the green Industry, get out
If you plan on going into the Green Industry, don’t
If you are in university, avoid environmental studies
If you are going to university, avoid environmental studies.
Frankly I am surprised that Tesla is still doing well. That is a company that is almost solely reliant on the AGW theory being dangerous.
Yeah, yeah yeah. Climate Armageddon’s-a-comin’…. again!
Well, for what it’s worth, if Dow Jones, or any other financial institution, is interested in GW, there’s money to be made.
So lets put our money where our mouths are. How about a sceptic betting fund? I have no idea how that works as I largely disagree with gambling. However, in this case, I’m prepared to suspend my objections (OK, I stand to make a small fortune [very small, but a fortune to me] on a safe bet).
If all of us chipped in £5 or $5, betting against the predictions of the alarmist’s, and roll it over to the next failed prediction, there would be tens of thousands of people who don’t believe in AGW with a few bucks in their pocket.
There are innumerable clever people on this site who, I have no doubt, could come up with a bet, or several, that would be a reasonable proposition, if not already in place at the bookies (British term for bookeepers?). A donation of all winnings to go to charity perhaps? Say, 20%.
And what a way to rub the alarmist’s noses in it.
Yes, pick a climate safe job like teaching in the inner city schools.